Monte Goulding wrote:
>
> Yes and as I feel HyperCard is redundant then I don't use the term
> background because all it does is confuse the situation.
Backgrounds and groups are functionally the same in MetaCard, but
syntactically different. When you ask for "the number of groups" you
will get back the number of groups on the card. When you ask for "the
number of backgrounds" you will get back the number of groups
(backgrounds) in the stack as a whole. This is a nice touch for those of
us who port HyperCard stacks to MetaCard. In HyperCard, "the number of
backgrounds" always refers to the number in the stack.
> One thing that
> annoys me is that there are some things that are put in for HyperCard
> compatabilty that actualy do their job and some that don't. As far as I'm
> concerned take all the HyperCard stuff out unless it actually is functional.
Allowing x-talk compatibility makes it much less work to perform a
HyperCard port -- and I'm doing a lot of those lately. I appreciate the
flexible syntax, and I hope the functionality is retained.
--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
HyperActive Software | 612-724-1596
Custom hypermedia solutions | http://www.hyperactivesw.com
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/metacard@lists.runrev.com/
Info: http://www.xworlds.com/metacard/mailinglist.htm
Please send bug reports to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, not this list.
